Hi folks,

JM seems to be one of those artists who provoke extreme reactions when they first appear on the scene. But once their initial impact has been absorbed, such performers rarely seem as bad as their detractors have claimed - or as good as their supporters have asserted. Only time will tell.

For what it's worth, my opinion is that JM has great potential, but still has some way to go before discovering what his strengths are, and how he can make best use of them. Meanwhile, if people are willing to buy his records and attend his concerts, then he has an incentive (as well as a democratic right) to carry on experimenting. And listeners who have doubts about his experiments should wait a while before condemning him and all his works in perpetuity.   

Of course, it's possible that some other performers are sore because JM has gained so much attention in such a short time, while their own worthy efforts have remained ignored or undervalued for years.   If so, they should stop griping and start learning.   However high our ideals, and however "pure" our repertoire, if we charge people money to hear us sing and play, then we are in show business. And to thrive in show business, we must either learn to give the public what they want, or persuade the public to want what we have to give. Either way, promotion is essential:

"He who whispers down a well about the goods he has to sell
Will not make as many dollars as he who climbs a tree and hollers." (Anon)

So far, JM appears to have made a very good job of promoting his career. In due course, we may be able to reach an informed consensus on the lasting value of his contribution. But for the moment, let's give him some time to work out what he can do best, and avoid subjecting him to a flood of excessive praise, or a barrage of over-harsh criticism.

Wassail!